Various critical criminologies exist; however, at their core, these theories share certain assumptions and commitments with one another. Identify these shared assumptions. How does this differ from the other theories you have learned about in this course?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

They share a perspective that asserts that the major sources of crime stem from the fact that unequal class, race/ethnic, and gender relations do in fact control society. This point is nicely captured in the words of David Friedrichs: “The unequal distribution of power or of material resources within contemporary societies provides a unifying point of departure for all strains of critical criminology.” These criminologists generally reject official/legal definitions and measurements of crime. Crime-fighting policies that emphasize such things as “zero tolerance” policing, three-strike sentencing, and private prisons--solutions that ignore major structural and cultural changes in society as essential to crime reduction--are also rejected by critical criminologists. Whereas conventional criminologists often claim to be value-neutral scientific experts, critical criminologists disavow this position as ideologically naïve and prefer to see themselves as more inclined to be politically active and committed to having their work reduce pain and suffering. How do they differ?